Steve: Stolen Pictures...How to deal with them

[Kenny_Leong]

The guy at least explains copyright. But he's a cocky son of a ..... I don't like his personality much. This is irrelevant, but that's just my opinion only. Although...at least he's directed everybody to copyright forms etc.

The company was wrong for using his photo without permission. But the guy sounds kind of crooked in his blackmailing ways as well.

[Paul(UK)]

Kenny_Leong wrote:

But if a lot of viewers view the photo, then it's hard to tell who distributed it right?

No because the IP address of the viewer is on the permanently on the JPG. If they give it away or post it on a forum, you will see their IP address on the image.

If the image spreads around, you can see at a glance that it's come from one source, or many

The idea is that it will discourage them from using it, more so than just a copy write message because they are telling the world who has stolen it

[bradg]

Kenny_Leong wrote:

The guy at least explains copyright. But he's a cocky son of a ..... I don't like his personality much. This is irrelevant, but that's just my opinion only. Although...at least he's directed everybody to copyright forms etc.

The company was wrong for using his photo without permission. But the guy sounds kind of crooked in his blackmailing ways as well.

Rick Rickman is not crooked, evil, bad or anything like that, he just knows what he is talking about, thats all.

[Kenny_Leong]

Paul(UK) wrote:
"No because the IP address of the viewer is on the permanently on the JPG. If they give it away or post it on a forum, you will see their IP address on the image."
[/quote]

Oh I see. I was originally thinking that the ip etc was just logged on the host computer. So you can actually see the ip etc on the image right? Or maybe I can assume it's sort of invisible, so that it's not easy to see it on the image. If the image is clearly visible, then the image might not be too valuable since it's been defaced already...due to the stamp.

[MrPogo]

You automatically own the copyright of everything you create, and it's yours till you sign it away in a legally binding contract. The issue may be whether or not you can prove it's your work, which is where places like the copyright offices come into it.

[bradg]

MrPogo wrote:

You automatically own the copyright of everything you create, and it's yours till you sign it away in a legally binding contract. The issue may be whether or not you can prove it's your work, which is where places like the copyright offices come into it.

The image belongs to you....yes. But how can you "own the copyright of everything you create" if the copyright does not exist? Last time I checked, something has to exist (copyright) before anyone can own it.

[MrPogo]

bradg wrote:

MrPogo wrote:

The image belongs to you....yes. But how can you "own the copyright of everything you create" if the copyright does not exist? Last time I checked, something has to exist (copyright) before anyone can own it.

What on Earth are you babbling on about? Once you've taken a photo it exists, and the copyright of it belongs to you. Copyright is "intellectual property", not a piece of paper.

[bradg]

If your rights are being infrenged upon, in order to make a valid suit, the image must be registered with the copyright office.

bradg wrote:

MrPogo wrote:

The image belongs to you....yes. But how can you "own the copyright of everything you create" if the copyright does not exist? Last time I checked, something has to exist (copyright) before anyone can own it.

Dang, somebody needs to use Google more often. This was taken directly off of the US Copyright office Website:

"HOW TO SECURE A COPYRIGHT
Copyright Secured Automatically upon Creation

The way in which copyright protection is secured is frequently misunderstood. No publication or registration or other action in the Copyright Office is required to secure copyright. (See following Note.) There are, however, certain definite advantages to registration. See "Copyright Registration."

Copyright is secured automatically when the work is created, and a work is "created" when it is fixed in a copy or phonorecord for the first time. "Copies" are material objects from which a work can be read or visually perceived either directly or with the aid of a machine or device, such as books, manuscripts, sheet music, film, videotape, or microfilm. "Phonorecords" are material objects embodying fixations of sounds (excluding, by statutory definition, motion picture soundtracks), such as cassette tapes, CDs, or LPs. Thus, for example, a song (the "work") can be fixed in sheet music (" copies") or in phonograph disks ("phonorecords"), or both.

If a work is prepared over a period of time, the part of the work that is fixed on a particular date constitutes the created work as of that date."

bradg wrote:

If your rights are being infrenged upon, in order to make a valid suit, the image must be registered with the copyright office.

Bull...see the post above. Please quit spouting incorrect information.